The future must not be beige

[altariel]

Oh Outcasts, with your big budget, your fabulous cast, your lovely starscapes – why were you so bad? [1] What in the name of God happens in our near-future to make human beings so humourless and interchangeable? Why do they all buy their clothes at Gap? Why was there a stupid conversation in which a man and a woman complained to each other (respectively) about women and men? How does Gap survive the apocalypse? And why oh why would anyone paint the future magnolia? Gods of the Tellybox, why do you taunt me?

Last year, I all but convinced myself that television – an intimate, domestic space – will always struggle to deliver an outward-looking sense of wonder, and therefore is hampered when it comes to delivering science fiction drama. I am revising this opinion. Because really all the Tellybox needs to do is show me a spaceship flying over a planet, and those early-formed pathways in my brain will happily respond, "OMFG SPACE."

But while film can get away with showing me a series of spectacular images for umpty minutes, television cannot. Television – domestic, intimate – requires people. But Outcasts did not have people. It had interchangeable person tokens. Interchangeable person tokens wearing beige. Not a glimmer of wit, not a glimmer of absurdity. Not – in other words – a glimmer of humanity. Outcasts (episode 1) took itself completely seriously. Oh dear me no.

Men, women, and all points between are from Earth. They only work in outer space.

This morning I watched episode 1 of "Revelation of the Daleks", and in 45 frisky minutes it delivered more wit, pathos, and humanity than I suspect the whole of Outcasts will manage in 8 episodes. Production values are of course miles apart (although "Revelation of the Daleks" still does well with a sheaf of peacock feathers and some marble-effect on the walls). But where Outcasts is outclassed is in the characterization. One short scene in "Revelation", partway through episode 1, summed this up for me. In it, company owner Kara (Eleanor Bron) hires the ageing mercenary Count Orcini (William Gaunt) to assassinate Davros, who is bleeding her company dry. The scene also involves Kara's lackey Vogel (Hugh Walters), "a past master of the double entry", and Orcini's minion Bostock (John Ogwen). These two are brilliant in their own right, although I just want to focus on Kara and Orcini.

The set is BBC studio standard; the dialogue (this being Doctor Who) could easily be played only for laughs. There is an undertone of absurdity – how can there not be, with William Gaunt in leatherette and Eleanor Bron in velveteen – but the absurdity is cut through with total authenticity. I have not been (yet) an ageing mercenary taking on one last job which I know in my heart is beyond my capabilities, but I can understand fear of mortality, denial, shame. I have not been (yet) the CEO of a company under the tyrannical thumb of a crazed scientist, but I can understand fear, desperation, the desire not to lose face. Look, the performances say, this situation is absurd – but what else can it be? Because human beings are absurd. They are self-deluding, they are desperate, they are full of fear and shame, and they are therefore, also, tragic. In the carefully judged particularities of these wonderful performances – which could after all be played cynically, contemptuously, purely absurdly – we are given the human condition. We are invited too to participate in that most human and alien of experiences – imagining the reality of another.

John Ogwen (centre), not being outclassed by either William Gaunt (left) or Eleanor Bron (right)

Not so in Outcasts, and this, I think, is because it has no sense of its own absurdity. Too busy being serious, being important, it has forgotten that television is, at heart, the intimate space, the domestic space, the space in which stories about people – particular, absurd, tragic people – unfold. Gods of the Tellybox, I implore you – give me a future populated by people.

Outcasts: outclassed by Colin Baker-era Doctor Who.

[2]

[1] NB I only watched the first episode; obviously this qualifies me to judge.
[2] tl;dr version: Next time, do it looking something like this, but sounding more like Hustle.

Comments

[azalaisdep.livejournal.com]

mrazalais came in grumpily from watching Episode 2 while I was pottering around in the kitchen, and was excoriatingly rude about it, grumbling about a great cast wasted on shoddy writing and pedestrian direction. And certainly the critical verdict of Teh Interwebz seems to be entirely with the pair of you.

(I use mrazalais shamelessly as a Crap Telly Filter, since I am v rarely inclined to carve out time to watch TV atm, and he has to poke me repeatedly with sharp sticks and insist "you have to start watching this!" - cf. Life on Mars series 1 - before I give in...)

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I perform that filtering function for mraltariel, although he did watch the first 15 minutes of Outcasts before going off and doing something else.

[uitlander]

I have been watching it, desperately seeking some sense of quality and awe and resisting the urge to stick a 70-80s Who on the DVD as an improvement. You are absolutely spot-on about the intimate space with TV. I can forgive 1970s production standards, Matt Irvine's hands and the over-exuberant use of airwick balls, domestos bottles and even the inapporpiate use of children's spinning tops (I'm looking at you, invasion force from the Andromeda Galaxy) as long as it has a decent script delivered with panache (and a strong component of self-irony). Why is it big budgets and decent quality writing so rarely go together? And more to the point, when are they going to let you do a script?

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I can't understand it, particularly with such a great production team around it - and a good writer too. It's a real shame, a waste of talent.

when are they going to let you do a script?

*shudder* I'm not a team player, and that's what telly requires!

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Ha, your daughter has good instincts! I might get her to watch the first few seconds of every new show and report back on whether it's worth watching!

Great icon, btw.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

I got as far as trying to find it on BBC iPlayer last night, but iPlayer wasn't playing. So not worth bothering to try again, really?

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Sadly, I think not.

[lonemagpie.livejournal.com]

The whole universe is beige, of course:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2013-the-universe-is-not-turquoise--its-beige.html

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Ha!

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

Very, very good assessment which gets to the heart of the matter. The dialogue isn't that of a real society, for the most part. I didn't find Mitchell credible as a leader, and though I found ep 2 more even than ep1, I'm not yet persuaded by the society we see.

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Do you think you'll watch the rest? I'll be interested to know if folks think it improves.

[jhall1.livejournal.com]

I managed one and a half episodes before giving up. It was all so unrelentingly grim, with no lighter moments at all. The only good thing in it was the child trying to memorise William Blake's Tyger.

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Yes, the kid was sweet.

[wiseheart.livejournal.com]

Ummm... you must forgive me, I'm just a stupid foreigner living under a rock, but - is this some new sci-fi series?

If it is, you're absolutely right. No big budget series has even awakened in me the sense of wonder the original Star Trek did - desipite the absolutely hilarious trousers the guys were wearing. And Shatner's abysmally bad acting.

[jhall1.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's a new British-made TV series being shown in eight one-hour episodes on the BBC.

[fallingtowers.livejournal.com]

I had some hopes for that one, but I already saw some rather disappointed live-watch remarks on Twitter, so I don't think I will even bother. I rather like the phrase "interchangeable person tokens" from your review, though.

[altariel.livejournal.com]

It's a great cast, and from a great production crew, and it's deadly. I don't understand it. Big disappointment.

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

I just got the first two eps and wanted to like it. i gave up after a few minutes thinking I'd be back. but after your post and all the comments...maybe not!!!

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I might switch on the last episode, just to see if anything changed. But there's a lot of other stuff I can be watching instead.

[edge-of-ruin.livejournal.com]

What no splendid hats or spiffy boots? I didn't see this but somehow I don't think it's going to be for me. Excellently well put as usual;-)

[altariel.livejournal.com]

And what sort of future is it without splendid hats or spiffy boots?!

[communicator.livejournal.com]

Spot on. can't argue with any of your comments. People don't talk like that, or do things like that. I gave up on ep 2 and watched Taggart instead

[altariel.livejournal.com]

We watched the first episode of "The Children of Green Knowe" and it was lovely.

[espresso-addict.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I use adverts as a bad tv filter, and these were baaaaaad; in fact the beigeness was already apparent. But it's nice to have commentaries informed by actually watching the stuff :)

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure whether I saw any of the trailers... possibly one or two. It's from Kudos Productions, who are usually fantastic, but they seem to have left their sense of humour at the door making this one.

[manna]

I didn't even enjoy Outcasts as much as that thing about the submarines with the guy who was rubbish in Jekyll, and that's saying something.

You're dead right -- there aren't any characters in Outcasts. Also, I can't understand how the writers could possibly stand on the set and hear those words coming out of the poor actors' mouths and not drop dead with embarrassment on the spot. HUMAN BEINGS DO NOT TALK LIKE THAT!

The single aspect the bad writing that annoyed me most was how stupid everyone in it was because the writers couldn't be bothered to actually construct some plausible scenario to get where they wanted to go. Like the patrol who went out looking for the daughter and who HANDED OVER ALL THEIR GUNS to the outcasts to stop them killing one girl THEY HADN'T EVEN SEEN ALIVE. It's just weak, lazy writing.

I want Luther back. It was utterly ridiculous in every respect, but at least it was fun to watch.

[executrix.livejournal.com]

I often think of Harrison Ford's "Y'know, George, you can TYPE this shit but you can't say it."

[greylin.livejournal.com]

I fell asleep!

[altariel.livejournal.com]

Good choice!

[lady-schrapnell.livejournal.com]

I'm relieved to see your response! I'd just finished reading Among Others and stumbled upon Outcasts and felt it was failish of me to have given up in about 20 minutes.

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I was watching on iPlayer, and the moment of decision was when I realised the second episode was on that night. I couldn't face two hours of it back to back. That's not how a story should make you feel!

[ithilwen.livejournal.com]

Ever notice that big budgets and quality are inversely related, at least when it comes to TV shows and movies?

[altariel.livejournal.com]

I think it's a risk ratio: the more money spent, the less risk is taken with the story.